Anonymous and Internet Anarchy

STM · #1 04-13-2011, 06:42 AM

Heyo,
Ok, so I realise many people know what Anonymous is already but until today, I only had the shallowest idea. So what are your views on Anonymous and internet anarchy in general? The idea intrigues me as they co-ordinate their attacks as a single hive mind, especially the Habbo Raids where they 'closed the pool'. Also, are there any other similar groups out there? Are you maybe a member?

Wings of Fire · #2 04-13-2011, 06:45 AM

Who remembers that epilespy raid where we had an anomymous apologist join just to take part in the discussion and claim that the forum was funded by scientologists or some horseshit.

My opinion of anonymous is not very high.

Dynamithix · #3 04-13-2011, 06:52 AM

Wings of Fire · #4 04-13-2011, 06:59 AM

Pretty sure that's South Park's parody of WoW griefers.

Dynamithix · #5 04-13-2011, 07:03 AM

I'm urging to say something completely sarcastic, but I'm feeling good today so I won't.

Yeah, it is.

STM · #6 04-13-2011, 07:12 AM

There was an anonymous here? I sorta feel like they're trying to be an internet version of the free masons minus the good work.

Wings of Fire · #7 04-13-2011, 07:21 AM

It's senseless to say 'There was an anonymous here?' for all purposes I was a 'member' of anonymous back in 2008.

Strike Witch · #8 04-13-2011, 07:25 AM

Lookit meee

I'm posting of 4chan

and stuff

Mac Sirloin · #9 04-13-2011, 07:33 AM

:

There was an anonymous here? I sorta feel like they're trying to be an internet version of the free masons minus the good work.

They've been around doing stupid, unhelpful shit for years. It's literally within the last two or three that they've even tried doing something positive, but they're just a collective of inept losers. Don't say 'An anonymous' either. They don't even deserve a name other than 'Living excrement.'

STM · #10 04-13-2011, 07:45 AM

Ok, I am just interested in the plausibility of a collective 'intelligence' (to grant them that) with no real leadership. Surely they will eventually break down as would a civilisation without a figure head or power holder.

OddjobAbe · #11 04-13-2011, 08:08 AM

I don't think so, because they aren't really a substantial group, are they? Nobody represents them and they constantly change as people either grow up or get bored of the whole thing and then some other young person/idiot fills the gap, because they think it's funny. The idiot/young person/both comes along and sees a suggestion. Along with a whole load of other people, they find it funny and decide to go along with it. A more suitable name for the group would be something like "The Young Persons and Fools Collective".
The point I'm trying to get at is that there's nothing there really to break down. There are only two things that can remedy the situation - either the failure of the internet or the destruction of human stupidity, neither of which are plausible at this particular moment in time.

Dixanadu · #12 04-13-2011, 09:08 AM

String them up.

A vast legion of acne, ridden virgins the lot of 'em.

STM · #13 04-13-2011, 09:59 AM

Also, why do they hate the Scientologists so much? I gleaned that it was because they think the scientologists are a group of brainwashers but they are a minority 'religion' for God sake.

Wings of Fire · #14 04-13-2011, 10:03 AM

Well Scientology is one fucked up popular cult.

STM · #15 04-13-2011, 10:04 AM

Hmm, maybe I need to google their arses?

Dixanadu · #16 04-13-2011, 10:07 AM

They worship some galactic overlord Xenu or some shit.

Google Tom Cruise.

Wings of Fire · #17 04-13-2011, 10:09 AM

And from what I remember they also apparently have labour camps in the southern US and their own sort of paramilitary force.

I think.

It's been a long time and it wasn't exactly from a neutral source.

Dixanadu · #18 04-13-2011, 10:13 AM

Scientologists go apeshit if you mock their faith.

Emesdee · #19 04-13-2011, 10:18 AM

:

Also, why do they hate the Scientologists so much?

They hate them because a Tom Cruise video was leaked where he was talking about aspects of Scientology and was acting very weird, like his appearance on Opera weird. The Church of Scientology had it taken down from most every site because it was making them look bad, and /b/ decided they had some divine goal to take them down. The protests lasted longer than most people figured, but they of course went back to doing minor stupid stuff, since a bunch of children who were basically in it for laughs are not going to successfully take down the Hollywood elite.

T-nex · #20 04-13-2011, 10:52 AM

I find Anonymous immensely stupid with their shitty "for the lulz" slogan. They lame ass feeling of privilege and justification. Their lame entitlement.
These people are wasting their lives on making people miserable when in fact, which their collected 'army' they could have done something great, other than protesting to some lame church.

If at least they did something other than getting their pathetic jollies off to making 13 year old girls cry on deviant art and youtube and bullying aspies.
What kind of pathetic existence is this? are they proud of their shit?
They could put their stupid effort towards something greater. At least find a pretentious lame topic that holds a meaning. Like maybe find secret documents or what do I know.

Wings of Fire · #21 04-13-2011, 11:00 AM

They did find secret 'dox' on Scientology if I remember correctly, there was a page or two on Encyclopedia Dramatica about it.

Dynamithix · #22 04-13-2011, 11:33 AM

I find them ridiculous with their "we are anon, we are legion never forget llololol" stuff.

Wings of Fire · #23 04-13-2011, 11:39 AM

We are over 9000

Take us seriously

Dixanadu · #24 04-13-2011, 01:10 PM

"People will know you're serious when you wear a tie."

Dipstikk · #25 04-13-2011, 02:20 PM

Wow, I was coming in here expecting the literal polar opposite of what's actually being said (sans the Scientology stuff which I knew nobody would side with). Props to Mac Sirloin and T-nex for saying exactly what I feel on the matter.

The idea of an anonymous protest group is encouraging, but the fact is that they have soiled their image with the "lulzy mudkippy 4chan" bullshit of the past however many years it's been around. Where Anon's concerned, you're in one of 3 camps- you're either

a. a part of the group or a supporter because of your ties to 4chan or the amusement you get from their antics

b. Completely unaware of their activity on 4chan, or at least semi-aware but apathetic and support their organized rebellions as of late

c. Painfully aware of their history and worried about their capacity for causing mayhem and chaos for their own amusement at the drop of a hat and mistrust them, and/or dislike them because of that.

Seems like camp C has the fewest members, at least that's what I gather, which is unfortunate. I'm glad some of them have broken off and support free information and some even supported the Wisconsin protests, but as far as I'm concerned, I'm sleeping with one eye open if they're involved.

A few months ago, there was an interview on BBC World Have Your Say with a member of the recent Anonymous movement involved in defending Wikileaks with a raid on a bank or something. It was frustrating, literally no one made any reference to Anon's roots with 4chan, or the shit they stir, or even what I believe to be the most important question of all: "how do we know we can trust you not to flip morals at the drop of a hat, 'for the lulz?'" It was a podcast, so I was kicking myself for not having had the opportunity to call in and drill the little bastard on how many ED articles he's contributed to.

When you come from a group of people who think ruining the lives of others on the internet is hilarious and sociopathic nonsense like that is actually enforced by other people there (i.e. calling someone a moralfag/white knight), complete with humiliating articles and the release of their names and personal information, then I'm going to be wary of you, and I wish someone would expose these people's sadistic past if the current anon branch is so supportive of "freedom of information."

Wings of Fire · #26 04-13-2011, 02:38 PM

I don't think there's anything to be gained from any party by drawing a link between 4chan and anonymous.

Dipstikk · #27 04-13-2011, 02:51 PM

:

I don't think there's anything to be gained from any party by drawing a link between 4chan and anonymous.

Except lulz, perhaps? IRONIC ECHO echo echo echo pingas

But there is a link, and I'm very aware of the history of the people with whom they share that link. That's what bugs me. Don't get me wrong, I could support their goals more, but the problem is, it's 4chan. No matter what they call themselves, they'll always share the history of those antisocial, sadistic morons.

Daxter King · #28 04-13-2011, 02:53 PM

I guess its cool to hate them now or something.

I post on /b/, though I have never partaken in any sorts of antics they conjure up. I will say some are pretty cool and I support them, but others are pretty terrible. I do believe that saying they are completely bad or completely good is ignorant though.

Wings of Fire · #29 04-13-2011, 02:56 PM

It's been cool to hate them since about 2008 when they did that epilepsy thing.

Dipstikk · #30 04-13-2011, 03:00 PM

:

I guess its cool to hate them now or something.

They bring the hate upon themselves.

No, they don't just bring it upon themselves- they ask for it, smear it all over their bodies, lather in it and rinse it off to prepare for the next heap to be tossed at them, arms open wide and face grinning with anticipation.

No matter what kind of attention we give them, they love it. All part of the "lulz." If that's their game, you might as well say what you really think, belittle them and call them what they intentionally make themselves look like.